Routine Proceedings / Motions

Committee report

Journals pp. 261-2

Debates p. 3176

Background

When the motion of Miss MacDonald (Kingston and the Islands) to concur in the second report of the Standing Committee on Indian Affairs and Northern Development had been moved, Mr. Reid (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council) rose on a point of order. Referring to similar cases that had occurred recently, Mr. Reid questioned the right of a committee to make a recommendation to the House that would involve the expenditure of money. Specifically, he maintained that concurrence in the report would entail "a commitment for the Government to expend money not only to enter into negotiations [with the Indian people] but to right alleged wrongs by the expenditure of money". This, he claimed, would be contrary both to the Standing Orders and the authorities on the subject.

Issue

Can a committee report recommend a direct order to the Government if the order requires the expenditure of money?

Decision

No. The wording of the recommendation is defective. [At the Speaker's suggestion and by the unanimous consent of the House, the wording of the offending recommendation was changed to conform with practice.]

Reasons given by the Speaker

If there is fault to be found with the wording of the report, it would be found in the passage which reads "... and to take steps immediately to enter into negotiations with the Indian people with respect to said title". By altering the phrase to substitute at the beginning "and consider the advisability of entering into ... ", the long-standing practices of the House will be respected, and any procedural difficulty avoided.

References

Debates, April 11, 1973, pp. 3175-6.